maybe boxing scoring and mma scoring works completely different i watch alot of boxing and not a lot of mma rampage won round 1 griffin won round 2 rampage won round 3 rampage won round 4 griffin won round 5 so can someone explain how griffin wins this fight? and in the eyes of 1 judge won 3 out of the 5 rounds?!?!?! and what the **** was the announcer talking about a 10-8 round in round 2 get outa here.... someone please educate me why griffin won this fight
You can whine in the other thread that was just made about this... Confuses the hell out of me when everyone feels the need post the same thread over and over again???
Seriously, make someone with brains a moderator so he can delete all these X# of the same threads. Just forget this thread, reply to the other one.
Round 2 pretty much was 10-8. What did Rampage do in that round? Nothing thats what. Meanwhile Forrest not only hurt Rampage but gnp him for pretty much the whole round. Also the round where Forrest locked in the triangle would be even or in Forrests favor so i think the decision was right.
forrest did no damge in that round other than two kicks the ground and pound was just rest for both guys no way a 10-8
you ****ing ***gots.... i asked a simple question shot out to the person who did answer .. your right im not a regular.... mma isnt that entertaining to me and after seeing this fight ill probably stay away from it more.. so lets say you do give griffin that 2nd round 10-8 what can rampage do about those kicks ? they didnt drastically change the outcome of the fight except for that one that spun rampage aronud and 1 in the final round the rest were pitty pat rampage was landing clean shots and was a better fighter in rounds 1,2,4 im just asking someone to make sense of this for me because i thought at worse it should have been a draw